– In your appeal what will the fact-collecting group of the OSCE Minsk Group find in the liberated territories of the NKR?
– If this mission arrives and really intends to observe the actual situation then it will find out that in most of the liberated territories Armenians from Azerbaijan live. And that they live in a possibly better life. And if they do not deviate from humanistic principles they should estimate it as a positive thing.
– It seems that the Armenian side is not very interested in providing a normal situation for the fact-collecting group. Vice versa, it seems that these territories are not being populated and they are waiting for a return.
– It is not so. In Kashatagh district of Lachin and in the former Ghubatli and Zangelan districts, which is part of Shahumyan region there is a population of Armenians that migrated from Azerbaijan. They are Armenian refugees. The satisfaction of their human needs is not only the issue of Karabakh but the whole mankind and especially political circles. Will this group do this? If they do so we will say that they are honest people, if not then we will say they are dishonest. There are such people both in Armenia and in the west.
– According to your estimations how many people live there?
– I don’t have clear data but these people have participated in the elections of the NKR and that’s pretty important. There is one MP in the NA of the NKR from Kashatagh district and one from Karvatchar district. It is not bad but would be better if this representation was increased and it would very right if the state resolved some of the issues of these people as Azerbaijani-Armenians. According to these estimations there are approximately 15.000 residents in the two districts.
– For many years you have been the head of the re-population project of Kashatagh. Is this project still continuing now?
– The re-population project can be separated into two parts – repopulation of Kashatagh and Shahumyan. This was also done in the other districts of the NKR. In the districts of Shahumyan and Kashatagh this process has been done in a more active and zealous manner. At this moment, as we showed the right treatment we have constantly been having growth of population even from Russia and a group of refugees from Europe. They have returned and benefited from the enabled opportunities. This has been going on till the end of 2003. But starting from then it was known that a monitoring group from the UN was due to arrive for monitoring purposes. They visited in 2005. Perhaps it was later consented with the statesmen of the NKR as a drastic change of attitude was noticed on their part. That was unacceptable.
– What is the reason of such a change of attitude?
– I think that it majorly depends on the legitimacy of Robert Kocharyan after the presidential elections of 2003 and the diminishment of communication with partner international and domestic organizations and as a consequence the change of the attitude.
– Does it mean that there was a pressure on Kocharyan not to increase the population in those territories and Kocharyan gave in?
– I don’t know about the pressure but he definitely gave in. I have worked since December 1993 when the region of Kashatagh was established. During that whole period there was the right attitude but things have changed in 10 years. Indeed, it is not right to blame only due to internal issues and Kocharyan. We should have also seen what the international organizations have been doing – the UN, the monitoring group. If they see that refugees are starting to love there and don’t have any other place to live and their only right is to move and live in those territories and if it previously was the territory of Azerbaijan but today has a different status they had to correct their attitude no matter what the legal status of the territory is. The opposite is inhumane and violates all the humanitarian principles.
– And the RA government is saying that by this mission the international organizations paid back to Azerbaijan for the withdrawal of the Azerbaijani resolution for the last UN session. Why did the visit of 2005 result?
– I don’t know that. For me the important thing was that if such a thing existed then what the reaction and response from our end was. We should have showed that refugees live here and the international organizations have to respect and assist their right of being a refugee. The money that comes from the Azerbaijani oil should to a certain extent serve the refugees, who live in those territories in order to at least slightly resolve their social issues. But from the behavior of the leadership of Armenia and the NKR we can see that as though from the outside they have convinced that it’s good that there is no support to the refugees. By knowing the people of Kashatagh I can claim that these people really wished that the leadership of their country jointly with international structures supported them and protected their rights as refugees. They are quite many over there and their interests need to be protected. They have many issues to resolve.
– Haven’t missions visited the region with the same purpose during the tenure of the first President of Armenia Levon Ter-Petrosyan?
– The first monitoring of the UN was in 2005. But many people have visited the region and have given their estimations. The change of political circles doesn’t have chronology and it speaks on behalf of the government of Ter-Petrosyan and against the government of Kocharyan-Sargsyan.
– Has there been any migration from these territories since 2003?
– Indeed, there has been perceptible migration. Let us clarify one thing. By saying repopulation we should understand what we mean. Those are not people that were taken there and made to inhabit there with profitable conditions. There is nothing like that. If Azerbaijan was keeping its refugees in camps in swamps and steppes on purpose then we are not doing the same thing. And we have never attempted to do so. During the recent years the international community was warning Azerbaijan of this inhumane policy. Repopulation in our country was done in a natural manner and the vacancy of employees was solved not only by refugees. It was done on a voluntary basis. And the right of voluntary abandonment was also maintained. But during the past years there is migration due to the attitude. If people see negative change of attitude and claim that there is change of the international community’s attitude and that there is a possibility that their fatherland may some time later belong to others, in the rule of which the life of their generations is impossible then they become frustrated not only in the NKR but also in Armenia and elsewhere.
– And perhaps a special policy should have been applied to increase the number of refugees and to ensue that the attitude to these people is changed and they have more prerogatives.
– The government has incompletely abided with their duties to the people of these territories starting from 2003. Before the Madrid Principles there was initially a document on the main agreements, which was signed by Kocharyan and Aliyev senior. It was printed by the Azeri media. The sixth clause of this agreement was defining, “De facto the authorities of Azerbaijan shall cease supporting the population of the Azerbaijani territories occupied by Armenia, including the annihilation of the privatization process in those territories, development of infrastructures and the establishment of local state bodies.” It is not acceptable for Kocharyan or any leader to come to such an agreement with any one. It’s impossible to agree on such matters. This is unacceptable for international structures and organizations.
– Was this provision realized?
– It was endorsed in a criminal way. And if it wasn’t implemented for 100 percent, that means that the state didn’t send its special forces to deport these people from there then it is a result of certain democracy level of the population of the NKR. Fortunately if you society is ready to forbid such a criminal act at least we can be able to avoid extreme crime level.
– In your opinion, which side of the game does the international community work on behalf of?
– In general, I think the balance was slightly shifted towards Azerbaijan but even if this “slightly” was shifted to Armenia it would be wrong to be too encouraged about that. The big picture should have been drawn on whether the RA and NKR governments are doing necessary steps to provide the solution to the issue if not within short terms then at least steps, which would bring to the expected results. We should assess that there is lack of efforts and work. They don’t do it. As long as the attitude to these refugees hasn’t become a priority, which will also be properly delivered and described to the international community this work should be assessed as incomplete and with defects.
– Do you agree with the opinion of Ter-Petrosyan, according to which the key to the solution of the conflict is in the hands of the Russian Federation?
– At least in the 90s this key was in our hands and it has continued till 2003 prior to the Madrid Principles. Gradually this key was passed to other players. In this case it is not that important who the major player is the west or Russia.